SLUG Mailing List Archives
Re: [SLUG] MetaSLUG [Was: SLUG Activities]
- To: "Jeff Waugh" <jdub@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <slug@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [SLUG] MetaSLUG [Was: SLUG Activities]
- From: "Dan Treacy" <treacy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri Feb 2 15:44:01 2001
- Organization: 5262 IT
- Reply-to: "Dan Treacy" <treacy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> We've discussed SIGs a few times now, and each time came to the conclusion
> that 'splitting' SLUG would lead to bad things.
How is having a SIG splitting SLUG? Unless you're making membership mutually
exclusive. I can see how a slug-debian mailing list might do so as people
try to keep down the number of mailing lists they monitor and would more
likely frequent the specific one. But why not set up the SIGs, they can have
their events and people can go to them and they can still go to and
participate in SLUG. Be honest and say SLUG doesn't have THAT much on and
scheduling conflicts wont really be an issue.
> I waver in and out of this - I think it would be cool for the more
> people to have a group of their peers, but at the same time, it sucks for
> the begginers, as they won't receive the level of understanding and help
> that they would have otherwise.
I think it depends on how you set it up. If your not careful you can end up
with another perl5porters. Which is just one big clique for the "in" people.
But as long as this was kept in mind and was set up to cater for the newbies
as much as the pros it could be avoided. This applies to all SIGs whether
general or distro specific. Sure you'll get some of them that by their
nature will exclude newbies, e.g. if you decide to have a kernel hacking
SIG.. not a real big demand amongst newbies to hack on the kernel.
No slight inteneded Jeff but in some ways I think that's flat-out wrong and
it may even be the opposite. Tell me something if you're a new user using
Debian and you want to learn a little more about it where do you think you
would prefer to go a meeting with 100-200 people (isnt that the attendence
at SLUG meetings.. I don't know living on the Central Coast and working most
Friday nights makes it hard to attend but I've heard that number bandied
around even more a couple of times. or would you rather go to a specific
group (the SIG) where their might be 20 or thirty people? This is in no way
a criticism of SLUG or the meetings or anything like that. It's just a case
of where people feel more comfortable and are going to get more help. And
also this way meeting Q & A's can be focused mainly on "generic" linux
issues and things to do with the "core" set of programs found in most all
the distros. I'm not excluding distro specific questions but then you don't
get the prolem of people sitting through half a q&a talking about a distro
they have no intention of ever using.
> Subject-specific SIGs are probably the way to go, and the Debian SIG idea
> great on that account. (Actually, there's a few times I've thought that a
> slug-debian list would be good, so we can stop irritating non-Debian users
> on the main list - trouble is, that's splitting the list again, and that
> would suck.)
It might seem strange but I actually like th idea of SIGs but dislike the
idea of splitting the mailing list at all. And example is I've been playing
around with Debian lately. Why? Well up until not very long ago I was pretty
much a RedHat/Mandrake guy, but reading about the Debian stuff on the list
convinced me to give it a try. And just the other day after I came back from
a trip as I was catching up I noticed the Progeny Debian thread that was
being discussed. It sounded pretty good so hence I'm currently downloading
I know for a fact I'm not the only one to have switched distro or try things
based on what they heard on the list. As much as I can see the benefits of
the lists I think it would only be bad thing to spilt the list up but OTOH
I think having SIGs is a good idea. For example look at MacLUG can anyone
say that has really split SLUG in anyway. Those who are going to come to
SLUG events still will and those that couldn't/wouldn't/won't will get their
info/Linux fix from MacLUG and in the end that's increased and helped a few
Linux Users and that's the overall idea isn't it.
Afterall when you think about it is SLUG basically a SIG of AUUG???
And how many AUUG users do we have?
> Everyone else: Is this a dangerous idea? Are new lists and new SIGs
I was away so I missed the start of the "meeting time" thread but this seems
like as good a place as any for my 2c. I like Ken's idea of more than one
meeting. I know it would suit me and there seems to be a need for it. Like
it or not SLUG is getting bigger and as Linux grows it will only get bigger
still. Maybe it's time now to start looking towards that time and putting
the infrastructure in place. I'm not sure where SLUG stands financially (and
maybe the committee arent either at present with our AWOL Treasurer!! :-( )
but I can see the long term problem with slug being one that has come up
already many times.. "venue". It's been bandied around the list before. Some
type of SLUG clubhouse?? Maybe a bakesale to raise funds?? LOL I can just
see someone writing a perl script to control the robotic arm to mix the cake
and pop it in the oven then there'll be the very cool hardware hack on the
oven and someone will pop an embedded Linux system in there.
But all jokes aside. While it's not nessecarily time critical at this stage
I think it's something the committee really needs to look at in the long
term. So if that's the case what do we do for the short term.
Have our regular SLUG meeting on the last friday, but have another one on
the second Monday for example (any time that can be chosen based on list
consensus) and sprinkled in between have SIGs.
Have the committee (or any nominated group) come up with a set of guidelines
for operating the SIGs under the SLUG banner and maybe liase with UTS to get
some space on specific nights during the month (thrid thursday and first
wednesday or whatever) obviously they would be able to be smaller etc.. or
maybe even look for alternate venues to have them or as a last resort let
the SIG organisers organise the venue themselves. Once you have a number of
nights set aside for SIGs then enable them to book in. I'm sure our esteemed
Webmaster Guru can hack up some online system for this so you may not even
need a person to oversee it. Have the guidelines for the SIGs fairly
flexible so the requirements on them aren't too onerous as to discourage
getting them going and help them get established, whether it be with
technical help, setting up mailing lists etc.. giving webhosting space, or
just general tech support for them.
Maybe instigate a new Committe position SIG co-ordinator or the like. Then
have the SIG organisers (this can be a permanent position or one that is
chosen yearly by the SIG members in each SIG) liase with the co-ordinator as
far as help etc.. venues times, meeting gudielines, so on then the
co-ordinator can report back to the committe and keep them apprised of the
situation. As far as money goes, that can be decided in the guidelines as to
whether or not SIGs are responsible for their own money (possibly just using
SLUG to hold onto it wrt bank accts etc..) or if any money they raise will
be just funnelled directly into the SLUG coffers. This is probably the area
the guidelines will need to be strictest. As you don't want a rouge SIG
siphoning off all of SLUG's cash reserves..
Well I've probably gone on far to long and bored you to distraction but
that's just some ideas that popped into my head. Do with them what you will
but I urge you to at least consider them. They are by no menas definiteve or
even workbale but hopefully they will get something going that'll benefit
SLUG in the long run.
Until Next Time.